I'm new to Solidworks, it's almost a month that I started working with it for my final project at the University. While it was easy to me to design using Sketches and 3D sketches easy parts I found two difficulties that I would like to share with you.

This is the sensor I would like to design for a very easy early stage of a conceptual design: How would you manage to sketch and extrudes the red holes? I don't know how to manage to cut extrudes working in the body of the cylinder I extruded before.

The red holes will be the easy part when you get to that point. Can you post what you have so far? You'll be much more likely to get help here if you show at least some initial effort. Please see Can someone help me with my school assignment?.

While Aaron Torberg achieved the planar surfaces with two cut-extrude's, I'd do this a little differently.

Extrude the blue end piece only up to the bolt surface. Draw a large square centered on the axis, and extrude that with a steep draft, like 80 degrees. That will get your four tapered faces. Then, cut away the 'corner' notches and a repeat of the cylinder edge, to remove excess material. The red circles are a straight forward sketch and cut once you have created the tapered surfaces as flat faces upon which to sketch.

Actually Tom Gagnon, if you looked at the model you would see that is exactly how I did it. One cut extrude creates the corner bolt pockets, and one cut extrude creates the pyramid shape where the circles are. The fillet because I was lazy and didn't include them in the bolt pocket sketch, the third cut extrude extrude is the circle, and a pattern to get all four.

Your way of doing it probably won't work cleanly. Drawing a square and extruding it will place a square pyramid shape on top of a round part...

I would like to pass on a tip my teacher gave me when I was new, do not use 3d sketches. I thought he was just being short with me but as I have learned more in solidworks I have found all the parts I used to try to make with a 3d sketch i can make 1000x easier with normal sketches, planes and features.

You can draw your second part right on top of your first part, use the face as the sketching plane.

I'm not totally disagreeing with you but I will just say that whilst making my V12 Engine model there were certain parts that 3D sketches proved to be a godsend with. For example, things like ignition leads, wiring and even certain hoses and pipes so don't discount it altogether.

I'm not totally disagreeing with you but I will just say that whilst making my V12 Engine model there were certain parts that 3D sketches proved to be a godsend with. For example, things like ignition leads, wiring and even certain hoses and pipes so don't discount it altogether.

Dave.

They are amazing, I just did not find them easy to use when I first started.

tomorrow I will continue to try hard and I will find a way to succeed in it. Anyway I'd like to ask you how could you manage to sketch over a curvilinear surface.

If I do open Solidworks, design a circle and extrude it for a particular lenght then I would be just able to continue to work on the top and the bottom area but not on the cylindrical one.

For example, for the same project I have to design also this sensor.

While I found pretty easy to go for a general sketch mad up by concentrical Cylinder I have no idea how to produce the ''holes'' in the second cylinder, and also the Inscription in that way. It should be easy but when I try to sketch in the curvilinear surface solidworks does works...

I'm guessing there are some components positioned in particular places inside this device?

The way I would start would be to create an assembly with these components positioned relative to eachother how you want them.

If there is symmetry or pattern in your design, then pattern things appropriately.

In the assembly model you can create 2d and 3d sketches that drive the positions of your parts. This is like the layout model feature but personally I dont like that, its rather a 2D concept.

Now you have your device internals you can then insert components for your housing parts. Begin as virtual components to start with and their shape can be driven by the internals.

Now you end up with an assembly that you can fiddle about with as the prototype device develops, and the housing parts will update to some degree if you move the internal components, such as change the angle of those three sensing faces (usually the parts fail to rebuild if you do that, so you have to go back through them and fix them where features fell over due to crossed lines in sketches etc.)

Then when you are pretty much finished, save out your virtual components as separate parts and reprocess them to break all the links so they are no longer driven by the master assembly. I find that best because otherwise its to confusing to come back to, or for anyone else to pick up. Every feature driven by the assembly is marked with a > in the feature history. If you leave the components driven by the top level assembly it does lead to problems if you re-use those components in something else at a later date.

This is more or less my workflow anyway, when developing our textile machinery sensors.

I'm guessing there are some components positioned in particular places inside this device?

The way I would start would be to create an assembly with these components positioned relative to eachother how you want them.

If there is symmetry or pattern in your design, then pattern things appropriately.

In the assembly model you can create 2d and 3d sketches that drive the positions of your parts. This is like the layout model feature but personally I dont like that, its rather a 2D concept.

Now you have your device internals you can then insert components for your housing parts. Begin as virtual components to start with and their shape can be driven by the internals.

Now you end up with an assembly that you can fiddle about with as the prototype device develops, and the housing parts will update to some degree if you move the internal components, such as change the angle of those three sensing faces (usually the parts fail to rebuild if you do that, so you have to go back through them and fix them where features fell over due to crossed lines in sketches etc.)

Then when you are pretty much finished, save out your virtual components as separate parts and reprocess them to break all the links so they are no longer driven by the master assembly. I find that best because otherwise its to confusing to come back to, or for anyone else to pick up. Every feature driven by the assembly is marked with a > in the feature history. If you leave the components driven by the top level assembly it does lead to problems if you re-use those components in something else at a later date.

This is more or less my workflow anyway, when developing our textile machinery sensors.

Hello,

I do approve of your workflow approach, but considering that the OP is new to SW, until he has more fundamentals under his belt, I think your workflow will add a layer of complexity rather than be an advantage to him that it really is.

This was my rationale behind suggesting to break his task up into smaller chunks.

Model basic building blocks of the task to learn the terms, syntax, options, etc.